In response to the letter concerning the boycott/teach-in around Justice Clarence Thomas's visit, I would like to say I wholeheartedly disagree with the description that the teach-in "marred" this week's events. Indeed, this perhaps was the most engaging and intellectually stimulating at the law school since I came here. The professors should be commended for adding a viewpoint that otherwise would have been missing.
First, a few important details. Thomas took open questions during classes throughout the day, but from law students, not professors. While Thomas explained his views on some subjects, he often referred to his "many opinions" on a subject to "see my thinking." Apparently, Thomas himself thought no one needed to "learn any more" on those, often controversial, issues. The only give-and-take between Thomas and a professor according to many accounts from fellow attendees, was at Thomas's table during lunch, for the benefit of a handful.
The professors had a choice: sit, watching students in a limited "discussion" with Thomas or not. Choosing not to attend, they decided to teach -- illustrating their justifications for disagreeing with Justice Thomas, and providing a very interesting, balanced set of materials on his background and philosophy.
A professor's job is to teach, not to sit quietly and add legitimacy to a figure's visit. To Justice Thomas, I say thank you for visiting and answering what questions you chose to answer. To the "Law School Five," I say thanks, I'm delighted you're the ones teaching me to become a lawyer who doesn't just wrap himself in discipline, reason and some archaic vision of the law, but also thinks about the people the law affects. I'm glad y'all are the ones staying here after this week. And you can "mar" my weeks any time.
Will Corbett
Student
School of Law
